State v. Nucklos

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Nucklos

872 N.E.2d 949, 114 Ohio St. 3d 1507

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided August 29, 2007·No. 2007-0754·Published

Opinion

Clark App. No. 06CA0023, 171 Ohio App.3d 38, 2007-Ohio-1025. Discretionary appeal accepted on Proposition of Law No. I.

Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and Cdpp, JJ., would also accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. II. Pfeifer and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent.

Motion for admission pro hac vice of John P. Flannery II is denied for failure to comply with S.Ct.Prac.R. I(2)(B). Sua sponte, appellee’s memorandum in response is stricken.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Clark App. No. 06CA0023, 171 Ohio App.3d 38, 2007-Ohio-1025. Discretionary appeal accepted on Proposition of Law No. I.

Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and Cdpp, JJ., would also accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. II. Pfeifer and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent.

Motion for admission pro hac vice of John P. Flannery II is denied for failure to comply with S.Ct.Prac.R. I(2)(B). Sua sponte, appellee’s memorandum in response is stricken.

State v. Nucklos, 872 N.E.2d 949, 114 Ohio St. 3d 1507 (Ohio 2007).

Pincite

872 N.E.2d 949 (State v. Nucklos) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related